I wish that people would just stop posting threads they KNOW will be controversial.

This, too. I mean - there are certain topics that come up via other conversations, but if you really want to know the general overall feeling of something that is commonly discussed and commonly becomes heated you should just do a forum search and read what people have already said on the issue.

Personally, things like the name discrimination that was brought up and cultural appropriation are two topics that are near and dear to me for a number of reasons, but you are very correct - there are just certain topics that have been discussed to death. Utilization of the "search" tool should be more common, lol.

Flick, I am sorry if you thought this was directed at you. It was not intended. Yes, I did post it after requesting a citation/source from you but, it was really meant as a general thought/plea/rant thing and not in anyway intended as a personal attack against a single person. That's not my style. I sincerely apologize that you perceived it to be aimed at you.

You are right NB is an opinion site, and I do look other places for more supported information.
I guess I just wish that we argued less and shared resources more. I figured this could be one way to be less personal on controversial topics and simultaneously be helpful to others. But your right, I am probably am asking for too much for an opinion site.

No need to apologize at all, if you felt as though something needed to be addressed then it's perfectly ok to bring it up - no ill feelings from me.

I also wanted to add that if you are looking to a name site for factual information, then you may be in the wrong place. Even the authors of this site do not cite their information and basically present the names on a basis of opinion rather than fact. There are other sites that are more fact based in etymology and such that you should try looking to for information.

I have to agree to this.

This site isn't particularly based on mainly fact, imo, so it's not surprising a lot of posters don't post citations. Also, when you're browsing a site one can't always be bothered to go hunting for that one article they read three summers ago.
However, when it's easier then yes, it'd be lovely if links could be posted.

Seeing as this is likely directed at me - I'm not too concerned with whether you believe what I have to say. I know what my experiences tell me and what I have learned through research. If you are interested then you should also research and come up with your own conclusions. You can take what I say for what it is, I'm not concerned enough with anyone elses opinion to go through old research papers from years ago when I was in college and post tons of citations on a NAME board, it's simply not that important to me.

That being said, I find it highly amusing that Blade can walk around and give out medical advice / opinions / facts and no one asks her to cite anything. In reality, we have no idea who she is and what her qualifications are. Just an observation.

Also, I don't like the name-calling, either. I feel as though there are several "prominent" members on here who are incredibly condescending and back-handed and when there is an opinion posted that they don't agree with, they jump right in and have to knock whats being said. "Wit", it's been called, recently. I'm sorry - but I don't see anything witty about putting people down, no matter how eloquently you happen to do so. There are people on here from all walks of life, all kinds of experiences and backgrounds and lately that is not being embraced, it's being put down due to a few certain members having their nose in the air and walking around like they can just say anything they want to anyone.

Funnily enough, I am almost the ONLY person who bothers to do this.

It's amusing how much I irritate you. You do know that ad hominem attacks are technically fallacious, right? They serve to make you look illogical and petty, and cast a pall over anything you say. As one of the more blunt, plainspoken, occasionally hostile members on this site, who has been told repeatedly in multiple threads that her feedback is unjustifiedly harsh, it is a little... interesting... that you feel so very passionately about tempering ones rhetoric.

As an aside, I think one should be able to actually back up any objective claim one makes. It doesn't mean laying out an exhaustive bibliography each time you discuss a more objective topic, but if you're wading into controversial waters and you want to make sure the message is heard loud and clear, not muddled by however people feel towards the messenger, be able to cite sources.

This comes up in two main arenas, I think: socio-political topics and any medical stuff that ventures into culture wars territory. I feel very, very strongly that there is a great deal of literally dangerous misinformation in certain domains of obstetric practice and infant health, but (ad hominem again!) simply stating the counterfactual without providing real, objective, easy to understand proof doesn't accomplish anything if people think you're just mouthing some tired, discredited party line. Being able to dissect and (in)validate opposing sources is necessary, too, in weighing the evidence. I don't think these are pissing matches but rather very high-stakes topics where, for example, babies' lives are literally at stake.

In the sociopolitical arena, there are subjective and objective statements. Saying "such and such is offensive" is nearly impossible to invalidate, but factual claims ("one billion Indians died during the British Raj") can and should be verified if people care and ask.

One a personal note: I don't like lying and liars and wasting time, and will continue to try to nip time wasters in the bud. I think nameberry is much more pleasant in their absence.

And if anyone opens hostilities towards me, I am not a gentle 'turn the other cheek' person and absolutely will give as good-- probably better-- as I get.